To some degree :-), yes, there are degrees of sin, though not in the same sense as the RC's understand it. The strongest language of the canon is reserved for apostasy... this same thought carries over into the New Covenant (the eschatological/redemptive-historical progression of what happens between the Israelites and Baal in the OC is what happens between the church and the apostasizer in the NC). It's why Christ could eat with sinners, yet Paul said don't eat with the excommunicated apostasizer. It reminds me of the Don Cheadle promos for the NFL... the playoffs took the name "Joe" and made it JOE. There is unbelief. And then there's UNBELIEF. Both damnable, but one gets greater condemnation (one won't find the language of Hebrews 10:29 used against the typical unbeliever). Chad Richard Bresson Xenia, OH http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "H Dorrington" <hjdinfl@...> To: <soundofgrace@...> Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 5:50 PM Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] John 8:11 and Condemn > So we agree now with the Catholics in finding degrees of sin? > > Adultery between two jews was punishable by death, I see no lesser > punishment > for adultery with a gentile, both punishable by death. > > Harry > > Chad Richard Bresson <breusswane@...> wrote: >> The phrase that the people began to play the harlot with the daughters >> Moab >> is sexual in nature and describes a relation of adultery. They were >> unfaithful. > >> "(which is always contextualized in the OT by Israel's whoring with other >> nations)" >> Is that not adultery? > > There is adultery. And then there's adultery with a Gentile. IMHO, there > *is* a difference. Not all adultery in the OT is equivalent (although all > adultery was considered a capital offense). Lev. is talking about the > former. The Phinehas event is in regarding the latter. "Degrees of > offense" might be a paraphrase. > > Chad Richard Bresson > Xenia, OH > http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "H Dorrington" > To: > Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 5:12 PM > Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] John 8:11 and Condemn > > >> The phrase that the people began to play the harlot with the daughters >> Moab >> is sexual in nature and describes a relation of adultery. They were >> unfaithful. >> >> Psalm 106:30 & 31 offer an interesting view of the events which I would >> view >> as a narrative when compared to Numbers 24. >> >> "(which is always contextualized in the OT by Israel's whoring with other >> nations)" >> Is that not adultery? >> >> Harry >> >> Chad Richard Bresson > wrote: >>> Your assumption is that the instructions in Dt 13 &17 that is specific >>> for >>> those who are worshipping false gods is >applicable to those caught in >>> the >>> act of adultery as well as all capital punishment cases yet you won't >>> give >>> the same value to >Leviticus 24:13 & 14 since the instruction does not >>> comply with your view. >> >> Not because "it does not comply with my view" but because one is >> narrative >> (a story about a woman and her son) and the other is precept (thou shalt >> not). A basic rule of hermeneutics is not to confuse genre. >> >>> In a similar fashion you found fault with the Numbers passage that had >>> the >>> adulterous couple killed not by stones but by a >sword or spear, yet >>> even >>> a third manner of punishment by drinking bitter waters is given in >>> Scripture. >> >> Again, you are, IMHO, confusing genre and not following a basic rule of >> hermeneutics. The Numbers passage is a narrative which makes no judgment >> about the adultery, but does about the jealousy (which is always >> contextualized in the OT by Israel's whoring with other nations). God >> himself, in his speaking with Moses, draws a one-to-one correlation >> between >> jealousy and Phinehas actions. You are drawing an inference that may or >> may >> not be there because the text does not explicitly tell us that Phinehas >> acted as an executioner for adultery. It *does* say Phinehas was jealous >> for God... and that is how we must interpret the event. Now, if you want >> to >> parallel the *jealousy* in the passage with capital actions against >> adultery >> you might be making an only slightly better case hermeneutically. >> >> But then again, this *jealousy* is directly correlative to whoring with a >> pagan nation, IMHO, and not necessarily adultery because the entire >> passage >> is not about adultery but about Israel's prostituting itself with >> Gentiles. >> To focus on the adultery is to miss Moses' point entirely. >> >> Chad Richard Bresson >> Xenia, OH >> http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "H Dorrington" >> To: >> Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 3:59 PM >> Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] John 8:11 and Condemn >> >> >>> >>> In a similar fashion you found fault with the Numbers passage that had >>> the >>> adulterous couple killed not by stones but by a sword or spear, yet even >>> a >>> third manner of punishment by drinking bitter waters is given in >>> Scripture. Your jot and tittle view of only accepting one means of >>> execution as instruction and dismissing the others as narrative accounts >>> seems contrary to the teaching that all scripture is profitable for >>> reproof and correction and if God allows these other means of correction >>> and blesses them (Num 24) who am I to find fault with Him? >>> >>> Harry >>> >>> "Chad R. Bresson" >> wrote: >>>>H Dorrington wrote: >>>>Do you view it as a paraphrased handed down narrative? >>> >>> If you're asking whether or not I believe Genesis 12:1-3 is a sum total >>> of >>> every single word God used in his call to Abraham, no. I believe what we >>> have is a God-breathed inspired narrative of what God wanted us to know >>> about his call to Abraham. >>> >>> But I believe it was prescriptive to Abraham and Abraham alone. We are >>> not >>> called to leave our countries (although we are called to leave the >>> kingdom >>> of darkness) as he was. You've attempted to show that the Lev. 24 >>> narrative about a woman and her son somehow negates the very >>> prescriptive >>> Deut. passages on witnesses and capital punishment. I grant that to >>> Moses >>> and the congregation it was prescriptive in the sense they couldn't >>> disobey it. But as narrative it cannot define for us the norm for God's >>> mandate on the witnesses being the first to cast stones. Even if I grant >>> the prescription within the narrative is *different* (I don't.. I >>> believe >>> Moses is only telling us about what happened with the woman and son what >>> God wanted us to know about the woman and the son), it would be God's >>> perogative to "deviate* from the norm of Deut. 13 & 17 (which is *why* >>> Carson would include the Lev. passage with the Deut. passages in his >>> apologetic. Leviticus is complementary, not contradictory). >>> >>> >>> Chad Richard Bresson >>> Xenia, OH >>> http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> -- >>> Read the Sound of Grace pages at >>> http://www.soundofgrace.com >>> >>> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >>> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... >>> >>> To view our online archive go to our web page at >>> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________ >>> Do You Yahoo!? >>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>> http://mail.yahoo.com >>> -- >>> Read the Sound of Grace pages at >>> http://www.soundofgrace.com >>> >>> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >>> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... >>> >>> To view our online archive go to our web page at >>> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Read the Sound of Grace pages at >> http://www.soundofgrace.com >> >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... >> >> To view our online archive go to our web page at >> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page >> -- >> Read the Sound of Grace pages at >> http://www.soundofgrace.com >> >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... >> >> To view our online archive go to our web page at >> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace >> >> >> > > -- > Read the Sound of Grace pages at > http://www.soundofgrace.com > > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... > > To view our online archive go to our web page at > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > -- > Read the Sound of Grace pages at > http://www.soundofgrace.com > > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... > > To view our online archive go to our web page at > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace > > >